lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Apr]   [21]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [Offtopic] Unicode, kernels, Linux and NT





> > #define dev_name_str L"\\Device\\ise"
> You're being unfair. The #define above already _is_ the Unicode string.

Alas, the above isn't true:
If I remember the wide character definition of C(++) correctly, a 'long'
string
is zero extended. Now if you use 7-bit ascii, or even Latin-1, then the
resulting
code is functionaly unicode (but NOT the same). However, if you compile
this
on say, OS/390 OE or an AS/400, which use EBCDIC, you are in problems.

The problem is that the C(++) wchar_t is NOT unicode. On most ascii based
platforms it usualy is (or the 31 bit ISO 10664), but on EBCDIC platforms
it is
something else. Totaly unimportant, until you want to write a truely
transportable
program.

Under C(++) there is no language supported manner way to write true unicode
or ISO-10664 code (or UTF-8 for that matter).

I like to be proven wrong, but I did some extensive testing on this
subject.

--
NaN (Nanning Buitenhuis)
nanning@elvenkind.com



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:0.034 / U:0.148 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site